Let us end the day's blogging by noting this happy story from The Australian:
AN unholy war has erupted between a star of the US evangelical movement and his Australian flock, with claims of bullying and unbiblical behaviour.
Former NSW chief magistrate Clarrie Briese, who nearly brought down former High Court judge Lionel Murphy, has led a confidential investigation into the international dispute being fought out among the international arms of "creationist" ministries.
Break out the popcorn, folks.
The article has quite a lot of choice nuggets, but I especially liked the ending:
The joint Australian-US push for reforms came amid concerns over Mr Ham's domination of the ministries, the amount of money being spent on his fellow executives and a shift away from delivering the creationist message to raising donations.
In his report, Mr Briese said Mr Ham and the US organisation responded with sackings, bullying and, in some instances, “unbiblical/unethical/unlawful behaviour” towards the Australian ministry that he suspected was intended to send it into bankruptcy.
“The report recommends that if CMI is to fulfil its fiduciary responsibilities to protect and safeguard the Australian ministry, CMI, and have a recalcitrant Answers in Genesis-USA brought to account for the serious wrongs it has committed,” he said, “CMI has no option left except to bring AiG-USA before the secular courts, the 'powers that be ordained by God' under Romans 13.”
Perhaps they can find a cell for Ham next to Kent Hovind.
- Log in to post comments
Maybe the reason why Ham built that awful "museum" was to generate funds for the lawyer bills?
Or more likely, to increase "the amount of money being spent on his fellow executives". Have you heard how much the directors of the 'tourist attraction' have given themselves from the $27 million?
Ken Ham and his fellow flock-fleecers are lying all the way to the bank. You know what they say, there's a sucker born-again every minute.
I get the distinct feeling that Ham's personal savior is actually Mammon with Jesus' name tag.
Funny (and telling) how in the fundamentalist mind the simple phrase "take him to court" expands to become "take him to secular court which is ordained by God according to Romans 13." Kinda reflects how fundamentalism affects one's whole view of the world, such that even something as mundane as a civil suit has to have God's stamp of approval on it, and a specific disclaimer that the courts are "secular". Even the most trivial things have to have religion mixed up in them.